The Sum of all Fears : What if Elenin is Nibiru?

Prove that everything is not made of candy!

Here is a rock, it's not candy. Proved a negative.

There are infinite possibilities if you think about it. It's just that half the time, negatives cannot be proven due to circumstances and limitations.

reply to post by DragonFire1024


These missions have however shown that comets are made of ice. In astronomy any volatile that has a melting point of over 100 K is considered ice. Comets are still frozen ice balls that begin to melt as they approach the Sun. This is the very reason the coma forms in the first place. The gases that were initially frozen begin to be release due to the heat of the Sun.

Originally posted by Theophoros

Originally posted by SatoriTheory
Instead of wasting time with more elenin-nibiru youtube videos, you should instead look and listen at the various speeches and news articles for the symbolic meanings.

We have already been told what is going to happen.

Nibiru is no where to be seen.
Elenin is not going to hit or affect earth.

st.

Actually, it has already been proven that Elenin is affecting the earth with earthquakes via direct alignments with the sun and earth - this is through what I call Electromagnetic Wave Propagation.

Guess you might want to "look and listen" a little closer next time...

Proven is it?

If you dismiss all earthquakes caused by HAARP and Elenin then we would have NO EARTHQUAKES. What's teh chance of having no earthquakes? NIL,ZERO, ZIP, NADA.

You've been fooled. But then again you do read and believe GLP.

But you do have some little pet theory that you made up to justify your insanity. I bet you believed Elenin was a Brown Dwarf and when it was proven that it couldn't be, you discovered the Electric Universe theory. See how easy it is to track the paranoia of a conspiracy nutter?

But you also said Elenin was Nibiru then debunked yourself by saying that Nibiru will come a year later. Well which is it? And so what? If we all going to die then so be it. As I've said before to doomsdayers, why do you care? You won't be heading to the hills until you see it on CNN anyhow so why bother trying "find the truth". Got a bunker? Got a cave? Didn't think so. You just want to drown in pity and misery for a year with others to make yourself feel better. Live live, be a skeptic, laugh at nutters, and delete your GLP bookmark. Life will be much better.

Originally posted by Theophoros

Originally posted by roughycannon
Well thats all geat but elenin disintegrated earlier this month as it came too close to the sun, being made of rock and ice it fell apart...

Find me a video of that, if you could please...

Here we have it. If it doesn't exist on YouTube it didn't happen. You need to seriously look in the mirror and reflect on life. How could you miss the disintegration of Elenin? 3/10 on the Conspiracy Theorist Awesomeness scale for you, sir.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by DragonFire1024

 

These missions have however shown that comets are made of ice. In astronomy any volatile that has a melting point of over 100 K is considered ice. Comets are still frozen ice balls that begin to melt as they approach the Sun. This is the very reason the coma forms in the first place. The gases that were initially frozen begin to be release due to the heat of the Sun.

Metal melts. Other compounds and such melt. Not just ice. I said it before and say it again: just because something melts, or breaks apart, doesn't mean it's made of ice. You keep saying "ice balls" or "balls of ice" etc. Fact: These are NOT balls of ice. No matter how much you want to believe it, the fact is the same: rocks and dust mostly. I am still waiting on someone to prove me wrong...

Elenin is not the first comet observed to break up. Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 frequently called the shattered comet is another documented case of a comet breaking apart. This is the infamous comet that hit Jupiter.

Shoemaker–Levy 9 passed within Jupiter's Roche limit, and Jupiter's tidal forces had acted to pull the comet apart. The comet was later observed as a series of fragments ranging up to 2 km (1.2 mi) in diameter. These fragments collided with Jupiter's southern hemisphere between July 16 and July 22, 1994, at a speed of approximately 60 km/s (37 mi/s). The prominent scars from the impacts were more easily visible than the Great Red Spot and persisted for many months.

source

Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by 46ACE

 

Well , you can prove a negative, sometimes.

Like here is a good example:

"Prove that my hand is Not as big as the entire universe!"

You can look around for 1 sec, determine there is no giant hand crushing everything in existence, and then easily find absolute solid proof that their hand is not as big as the universe. If photographic evidence is necessary for proof, than take pics, if the pics reveal anything except a giant hand, than you have proved the negative.

This is a very rare exception but there is indeed exceptions although tenuous at best.

But... I can't prove you don't have a left hand. Unless I visit you and "point"it out to you. .
Well; Momma always said: (" ay- tee- ess is lack a box o' chocalates")..wait a minute, that was someone else's Momma:
My Momma used to say:""never say never or always" there's an exception to everything.

reply to post by DragonFire1024


Out in deep space is real cold because it is away from the Sun and any stars.

There are several substances that are common elements in the universe that are either gases or liquids at Earth type temperatures but solidify at the temperatures of deep space.

Elements like Carbon Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, Methane, Ammonia and Water.

All of these freeze solid at low temperatures, melt at high temperatures and when they are frozen, we call that ice.

We can determine the composition of some comets by spectroscopy and have confirmed that when the comets are bright enough for the instruments to measure, they contain significant quantities of these substances.

This has been going on since 1950 when astronomer Fred Whipple coined the term "dirty snowball" to describe comets.

The Giotto, Vega 1 and Vega 2 probes confirmed the out gassing of this melted ice from "real close up" to Halleys Comet in 1986.

The Deep Impact probe smashed the crust of comet Tempel 1 which showed that under dry crust of the comet, was a lot of water ice. The same probe (renamed EPOXI) flew past the comet Hartley 2 and observed the out-gassing of jets of matter primarily consisting of water (which must have been frozen at deep space temperatures and had now melted). Please note that in a vacuum, water boils off, (sublimates) at low temperatures. It doesn't need to exceed 100 degrees C to boil. It is the same with other similar chemicals too.

Recent analysis of the coma of comet Wild 2 that was returned to Earth for analysis by the Stardust mission identified the presence of Iron and Copper Sulphide minerals that must have been formed in the presence of water. Which indicates that the comet contained water which, of course would have been ice at deep space temperatures.

Although later probes and data indicate there is less ice than previously theorised, comets still contain ice and the coma & tail we see around comets is caused by the sublimation and melting of that ice.

Originally posted by SatoriTheory

Originally posted by Theophoros

Maybe you should drop dead.

I tried that several years ago, they sent be back, telling me my work annoying Nibiru believers was not yet complete.

st.

You are my hero.

When GLPers come here poasting YouTube videos of nutters and screaming it's "proof" I go searching for my Picard facepalm gif.

Giiiit. Back to GLP wit ya. Giiiiiit.

Originally posted by chr0naut
reply to post by DragonFire1024

 

Out in deep space is real cold because it is away from the Sun and any stars.

There are several substances that are common elements in the universe that are either gases or liquids at Earth type temperatures but solidify at the temperatures of deep space.

Elements like Carbon Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, Methane, Ammonia and Water.

All of these freeze solid at low temperatures, melt at high temperatures and when they are frozen, we call that ice.

We can determine the composition of some comets by spectroscopy and have confirmed that when the comets are bright enough for the instruments to measure, they contain significant quantities of these substances.

This has been going on since 1950 when astronomer Fred Whipple coined the term "dirty snowball" to describe comets.

The Giotto, Vega 1 and Vega 2 probes confirmed the out gassing of this melted ice from "real close up" to Halleys Comet in 1986.

The Deep Impact probe smashed the crust of comet Tempel 1 which showed that under dry crust of the comet, was a lot of water ice. The same probe (renamed EPOXI) flew past the comet Hartley 2 and observed the out-gassing of jets of matter primarily consisting of water (which must have been frozen at deep space temperatures and had now melted).

Recent analysis of the coma of comet Wild 2 that was returned to Earth for analysis by the Stardust mission identified the presence of Iron and Copper Sulphide minerals that must have been formed in the presence of water. Which indicates that the comet contained water which, of course would have been ice at deep space temperatures.

Although later probes and data indicate there is less ice than previously theorised, comets still contain ice and the coma & tail we see around comets is caused by the sublimation and melting of that ice.

Ice = H20. Especially when you refer to it as "snow." There is water on these things, but again it boils down to the fact that they contain less H20 (water ice) than thought. You can weasel word it all you want. The fact remains that they don't contain as much water ice or "ice" as they previously thought and are mostly compromised of more substances than water/ice. Yet we are being taught the exact opposite. If stars spit water then it is logical that everything around us contains some H2O in some form or another. Comets simply are not one of those things. When we can find a comet that contains as much water ice as scientists claim they contain I will believe it.

Originally posted by chr0naut
reply to post by DragonFire1024

 

Out in deep space is real cold because it is away from the Sun and any stars.

I would argue that space does not have a temperature at all. Being there is nothing there to gauge temperature from.

Temperature is the level of excitement or vibration that a atom/molecule exhibits, and in space there is emptiness.

The only thing with temperature are Objects in space. Not the space itself. Space cannot have a temperature by definition.

Good lord almighty, I can't wait until this stupid comet comes and goes. I am getting tired of these threads.

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
Good lord almighty, I can't wait until this stupid comet comes and goes. I am getting tired of these threads.

Then when it's over we will have freaky scenario Y or Z to replace it.

Let us consider this an opportunity to help explain things to people and inform them of our discoveries and findings. Or even just simple philosophical points.

All we have to do is try, and we can make the world a better place.

reply to post by DragonFire1024


As I have stated already, in astronomy any volatile that has a melting point above 100 K is called ice. It is these very volatiles that compose comets.

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by DragonFire1024

 

As I have stated already, in astronomy any volatile that has a melting point above 100 K is called ice. It is these very volatiles that compose comets.

more misinformation...call it what it is, or don't open your mouth.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Theophoros

 

No. It won't pass between the Sun and Earth.
It will be above the ecliptic at that time.

True.
From a 3 dimensional perspective, anyway.

reply to post by DragonFire1024

When we can find a comet that contains as much water ice as scientists claim they contain I will believe it.

Please think about this remark.

Scientists are the ones measuring the content of water ice in the comets and are the ones who have told us.

They are the same people describing comets as "dirty snowballs" and as having a composition "like a snowbank".

Your comment means that when they tell you how much water is in a comet, you won't believe it because "they" told you.

How else are you going to be informed? YouTube & GLP perhaps?

Originally posted by chr0naut
reply to post by DragonFire1024

 

When we can find a comet that contains as much water ice as scientists claim they contain I will believe it.

Please think about this remark.

Scientists are the ones measuring the content of water ice in the comets and are the ones who have told us.

They are the same people describing comets as "dirty snowballs" and as having a composition "like a snowbank".

Your comment means that when they tell you how much water is in a comet, you won't believe it because "they" told you.

How else are you going to be informed? YouTube & GLP perhaps?

Oh so they point a telescope at it or whatever and SAY that they are made of "ice" (H2o)...but what's the proof? Aside from landing on it there is none. You can yell at me all you want. Science has been proven wrong before. The facts are simple...it's YOUR choice to believe them or not. To this day, NOT one single comet has been found to be composed of water ice. Period. Rock yes. Dust, yes. Etc yes. water ice? not so much.

I don't care about YouTube like that or whatever else you mentioned (GLP?) I base my facts off: facts. Go read up on the Stardust mission and the Deep Impact mission and tell me just how much water ice they found in these comets. It is a lot less than the other misc. materials they found. Don't accuse me of using YouTube as a source for facts or the other likes. I am not going to agree with you is another fact. Don't go to the level of insults to get your point across.

reply to post by DragonFire1024


DragonFire1024

I really do not want to have a continual fight here. But I have to make this observation.

You are quoting current scientific findings in your inquiry, however you are stating that they have resulted in facts.

This shows to me that you do not have much of an understanding of the scientific method. There are no FACTS here when it comes to discussing the nature of comets. This is 100% theory, and it will be that way until science actually has a piece of one, in hand and even then it will only be a FACT for that particular comet.

Science says that they are 50% water and other compounds and elements like carbon, Iron, Methane, Olivine, and a mariad of other stuff. So..... What is your point?